Police Role in the Community - Kean Universityjdrylie/docs/Microsoft PowerPoint - Police Role...
Transcript of Police Role in the Community - Kean Universityjdrylie/docs/Microsoft PowerPoint - Police Role...
Police Role in the Community
James J. Drylie, Ph.D.
Chapter 1
Defining Community Policing
• Emerged in the 1980s and 90s.
• There is no one single definition.
• It is a philosophy that promotes organization strategies.
• Supports systematic use of partnerships and problem-solving techniques to proactively address immediate conditions.
• It is a collaborative effort between the police & community.
Four principles
• Community engagement
• Problem solving
• Organizational transformation
• Crime prevention involving the police and the community.
Basic themes
• Police-community partnerships
• Proactive, problem-solving approach to the police function.
The Evolution of Policing • The British Contribution:
– Mid-eighteenth century England experienced significant social change.
– London was under siege.• Criminality was rampant.
• Punishment was disproportionate.
– The Bow Street Runners• Henry Fielding – magistrate of Bow Street.
• Noted the disproportional punishment.
• Argued for a reform of the criminal code to deal with crime to focus on the origins of crime.
Sir Robert Peel
• In the early nineteenth century Sir Robert Peel, a member of British Parliament, recommended a full-time, professional police force be established in London.
• There were strong political and social objections.
• Fearful of the development of a strong, centralized police organization.
Harsh Law
• At the time there were over 200 crimes that a person could be hanged for.
• The fear was that the police would enforce the law resulting in high levels of punishment.
• It would take seven years before Peel was successful in presenting a bill to Parliament.
The Metropolitan Police
• The British Parliament passed the Metropolitan Police Act of 1829.
• The principal objective of this law was– The prevention of crime
– Peel argued that success in reducing crime was stopping it before it was committed, not through apprehension after the fact.
• The constable on patrol.– A uniformed officer.
– Each with an individual number that was visible.
Peel’s Principals of Policing
• Basic mission is to prevent crime and disorder.
• Ability to perform police duties is dependant on public approval.
• Police must secure willing cooperation of the public in voluntary observance of law.
• The use of force by police proportionately diminishes degree of public cooperation.
• The use of physical force to the extent necessary.
• The police are the public, and the public are the police.
• The police should not usurp the power of the judiciary.
• The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder.
The Early American Experience
• 1833 – a part-time force in Philadelphia.
• 1844 – NY Legislature established a full-time preventive police force in NYC.
• Lack of similarity to the Metropolitan Police in London.– Localized control at the city level.
– Early political patronage on selecting personnel was an acceptable practice.
– Positions were awarded based on personal relationships, not qualifications.
• 1852 – New Orleans and Cincinnati
• 1854 – Boston and Philadelphia
• 1857 – Baltimore and Newark
• 1880 – virtually every major US city established a police force.
• Establishment of police forces often followed conflict and disorder in a city.
• Between 1840-1870 there were a significant number of civil disturbances in many US cities.
The Three Eras of US Policing
• Throughout US history there has been three major paradigm shifts in the evolution of policing.
– The Political Era
– The Reform Era
– The Community Era
The Political Era
• Began with the origins of early American police organizations in the 1840s.
• Major cities and local townships developed police agencies in response to social disorder.
• Extended into the first quarter of the twentieth century.
• Policing was closely tied to local politics.
Patronage
• Police officers were from the communities they
worked in.
• Highly decentralized system based on local
autonomy.
• The chief was a political appointment with a
vested interest in maintaining the political status
quo.
– Patronage or spoils system.
• National Commission on Law Observance and
Enforcement – appointed by President Hoover in
1929.
– The Wickersham Commission
The Wickersham Commission
• Named after the chair, George Wickersham, a former U.S. attorney general.
• Published a series of reports in 1931 that was highly critical of police practices.– Report 11 was titled Lawlessness in Law
Enforcement• Described problems with brutality – the third
degree, illegal detention, refusal to allow suspects access to counsel.
– Report 14 was titled The Police• Examined police leadership, administration,
inefficiency and corruption.
The Reform Era
• From the 1930s to the 80s
• Also referred to as the progressive era.
• An emphasis on preventive automobile patrol and rapid response to calls for service.
• Key figures– August Vollmer
– O.W. Wilson
– Raymond Fosdick
• The move was toward professionalism.
• The thin blue line emerged.
Closer analysis
• Under Vollmer – the first college police program was
developed at UC Berkley
– Radios in police cars
– Fingerprint/handwriting classification systems
– MO files
– Motorcycle patrols
• Wilson– Advocated preventive patrol
• There was the move to disassociate the police from local politics.
The Professional Model
• Police were seen as crime fighter.
• They were the professionals
• Society allowed greater autonomy
• The police were expected to be impartial enforcers of the law.
– The police began to relate to citizens in
professionally neutral and distant terms
(Kelling & Moore, 1991).
• The mobile police car further distanced the police from the public.
The 1960s
• The professional model of policing began to crumble as the country was in the midst of social change.
– The police would often be center stage in
much of the turbulence that was occurring.
• A dichotomy emerged – Us vs. Them
Breakdown
• Social problems are a change agent
• The Civil Rights Movement, the Vietnam War, the Due Process Revolution, and many other issues challenged the status quo.
• The effectiveness of the police was being questioned.
– Crime was rising
– Fear of crime kept pace
– Differential treatment of minorities
Change on the Horizon
• Policing was under intense scrutiny.
– The culture
– Styles of policing
• It was determined that police
– Were more apt to handle incidents and
problems informally;
– The mission of policing was losing to the
personalities;
– Arrests were being used for purposes not
associated with lawful detention
– Individual police discretion was routinely used
The Dirty Harry Syndrome
• The ends justify the means.
– Success was measured in
• Numbers
• Time
– This focus neglected the underlying premise:
the work.
Examining Police Services• President's Commission on Law enforcement
and Administration of Justice (1967-68)
– Safe Streets Act and Law Enforcement Assistance
Administration provided funding for police-related programs.
• National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorder
(1967)
– Examined patterns of disorder and prescribed federal,
state and local response.
• Commission on Campus Unrest
• National Commission on Criminal Justice
Standards and Goals (1973)
– Attempted to develop standards for crime control
The Courts
• Several US Supreme Court decisions decided by the Warren Court had a direct impact on police practice and procedures.
– Mapp v. Ohio
– Gideon v. Wainwright
– Escebedo v. Illinois
– Miranda v. Arizona
Other challenges
• The reactive nature of the police response to crime was challenged with the classic study on police effectiveness;
– The Kansas City Preventive Patrol Study
found that increasing or decreasing
preventive patrol had no significant effect on
crime.
Advent of community policing
• By the 1980s the “war on crime” metaphor was enlisting new help; the community.
• The roots of this new paradigm can be traced to the Kerner Commission (1968) that examined civil disorder in the US condemning racism and calling for aid to African-American communities to avert further racial polarization and violence.
Democratic policing
• This new era ushered in an approach that is designed to foster mutual trust between the community and the police that serve and protect them.
• Mentel (2008) outlines core principles that help guide fair and democratic policing:– Engage the community to create/maintain trust
– Maintain rights to privacy while protecting national security
– Account for diversity when developing strategies
– Commit to integrity and combating biased policing
– Build relationships with the media
– Encourage openness and innovation through technological and strategic advancement
Reactive v. Proactive
• Reactive policing is a
traditional form of
responding to calls for
service.
• Significantly
strengthened through
the 9-1-1 system
• Proactive policing
anticipates problems
and seeks solutions
to solve them.
Features of CP• Several major features
– Regular contact between officers and citizens– Department-wide philosophy
– Department-wide acceptance
– Internal/external influence and respect for officers– Well-defined police role including both reactive and
proactive measures– Officers act as a catalyst and leader for change in
neighborhoods to reduce fear, disorder, crime, and decay
– Officers are viewed as having a stake in the community
– When intervention is necessary, informal social control is the first choice
– Citizens are encouraged to solve many of their own problems
The essential elements of CP
• There are three essential elements:
– Partnerships
– Problem-solving
– Organizational change
• Cordner (1999) suggests that there are four
dimensions:
– Philosophical
• More a philosophy than programmatic
– Strategic
• The means to put CP into practice
– Tactical
• Translates the former into concrete programs and practics
– Organizational
Chapter Points
• Chapter terms
– Page 3
• Table 1.1
– The Eras of Policing
• Table 1.2
– Traditional v. Community Policing